Chuck Baldwin is a Radio Talk Show host, syndicated columnist, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. I encourage Chuck Baldwin to read and heed Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall and share its message with his audience.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

President Teddy Roosevelt said, "The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing as a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities."

We must renew America by restoring the racial dominance of people of white color as our former immigration policy insured (that the treacherous drunk and murderer Senator Ted Kennedy perverted in 1965).

I remember when we were being bombarded with how the “Serbs are evil,” and I thought who says so? By what standard? Then The Philadelphia Trumpet began to expose how the United States was fighting Germany and the Vatican’s opposition, how we were betraying our former Serbian allies and supporting our former enemies!

Saturday, August 28, 2010

The elections of 2008 (and the early elections of 2010) produced two significant phenomena: the “Ron Paul Revolution,” and the “Tea Party Movement.” And, mark it down: both of them will have profound effects upon the upcoming November elections–and upon the 2012 elections as well. Call them what you want, however, America doesn’t need another movement; it needs a genuine revolution.

The Tea Party movement, while still a force with which to be contended, has already been diluted and compromised. The primary elections plainly reveal the reality of this fact. The high spots so far are the defeats of Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Bob Bennett in Utah. The low spots so far are the reelection of John McCain in Arizona and the election of Dan Coats in Indiana.

John McCain’s election, in particular, demonstrates how many conservatives and “revolutionaries” still don’t get it. If any State in the union should have an up-close-and-personal look at what we are up against, it would be the people of Arizona. After all, they are on the front lines in the fight of one of the most important battles currently being waged in our country: illegal immigration. And John McCain is one of the worst offenders in terms of facilitating and encouraging this illegal invasion. Yet the people of Arizona reelected McCain to the US Senate. (It would interesting to know how many illegal aliens voted for McCain, would it not?)

Then again, John McCain received the enthusiastic endorsement of former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin. This endorsement obviously brought McCain thousands of Tea Party votes that otherwise would have gone to his principal opponent, J.D. Hayworth. McCain is not the only Big-Government globalist neocon to receive Palin’s endorsement. Many of Palin’s endorsees are neocons; which leads to one of the biggest problems with any so-called conservative movement: allowing celebrity-type “conservatives” to become the de facto leaders and spokesmen for what should be a true grassroots, people-generated rebellion. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are the two biggest culprits in this regard.

Mark my words: Palin and Beck may see themselves as part of a conservative “movement,” but they want nothing to do with an old-fashioned, honest-to-God, Patrick Henry-style revolution. In fact, they are doing everything in their power to keep such a revolution from taking place.

This does not mean that Palin and Beck do not contribute some good things to freedom’s fight. They do. The problem is, for every good thing they contribute they counterbalance it by supporting establishment principals, such as John McCain and Newt Gingrich, and attacking non-establishment players and ideas, which serves only to keep the Big-Government power structure firmly ensconced in Washington, D.C.
Get real, folks, and start thinking for yourselves. Ask yourself why Fox News never (or hardly ever) invites non-establishment patriots to appear on their network. Why do you not see former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts on Fox News? Why do you not see former Georgia congressman and Presidential candidate Bob Barr on Fox News? Why do you not see former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura on Fox News? Why do you not see former Director of the US Office of Economic Opportunity and Presidential candidate Howard Phillips on Fox News? Why do you not see Presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin on Fox News? The list is endless.

Fox News is not “fair and balanced.” It is as controlled and manipulated as any other media news network. The only thing it balances is the other networks’ infatuation with the Democrat Party, by promoting Republican candidates and ideas. What it does not do is educate and inform the American people with the truth as to what both major parties are doing to destroy our country. But remember, Fox News is owned by Keith Rupert Murdoch, the same man who helped finance Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the US Senate, and who is as much of a globalist as anyone in Washington, D.C., or New York City.

As an aside, and speaking of Hillary Rodham, I predict that she will replace Vice President Joe Biden BEFORE the 2012 elections. I’ve said that in private for many weeks, and now say it in this column–remember, you heard it here. The Clinton-Bush Crime Syndicate (CBCS) needs Hillary in the White House badly, and Obama has readily accepted a subservient role in the criminal affairs of CBCS (for very profitable reasons, no doubt). And with the CBCS bosses pretty much running things at the White House (they don’t worry about domestic or social issues, providing that these do not interfere with their international criminal activities), is it any wonder that Obama has already taken more vacations than most Presidents take during an entire term?

And it is the influence of globalists and neocons upon national and international politics that the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck simply do not get–or do not want to get. And because many Tea Partiers are so enamored with these two (and allow them to do much of their thinking for them), they remain clueless as well.

Ladies and gentlemen, America is in the throes of socialist and Marxist political upheaval. The curtain could fall at any time. The American people need to wake up to this truism: a “conservative” movement–even a conservative Tea Party movement–will not save us. The only thing that will save us is an old-fashioned State revolt.

Arizona had the opportunity to become a modern-day version of 1775 Massachusetts. But Arizona has probably forfeited that leadership role by 1) reelecting John McCain, and 2) being willing to allow federal courts to dictate law to a sovereign State. Instead of taking its case to the federal courts, Arizona should simply tell the federal government that it will enforce its own State laws (including the newly enacted anti-illegal immigration law) regardless of what any federal court says or doesn’t say. At some point, that is exactly what some State (or group of states) in this union is going to have to do, or liberty will be forever lost.

As long as freedom lovers are content to remain satisfied with the status quo by allowing party politics and media celebrities to dominate their efforts, there will be no stopping this socialist avalanche that is crashing down upon us. The Tea Party movement of 2010 (if left free of Big-Government neocons) could certainly translate into positive developments this November; that is for sure. A revival of the “Ron Paul Revolution” in 2012 could also make a significant contribution, but it is going to take a State revolution to seal the deal. I, for one, am ready.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Anyone paying attention knows that John McCain has been a Big-Government Globalist Neocon (BGGN) for virtually his entire senatorial career. As with many BGGNs hiding out in the Republican Party, McCain likes to talk about smaller government, but his track record is littered with the promotion of one big government program after another. But, what else would one expect from a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)?

Lately, however, McCain has outdone himself. He has introduced two bills in the US Senate that are about as Machiavellian as they could be. I am referring to S.3081, a bill that would authorize the federal government to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial, and S.3002, a bill that would authorize the federal government to regulate vitamins, minerals, and virtually all health and natural food products.

According to Examiner.com, “John McCain introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would actually allow U.S. citizens to be arrested and detained indefinitely, all without Miranda rights or ever being charged with a crime.”

The Examiner report continued by saying “This bill, introduced by McCain, who despite overwhelming evidence, claims to be a ‘conservative,’ would not only take away our right to a trial, but would also allow the federal government to arrest and imprison anyone the current administration deems hostile.

“Of course, that would be the same administration whose Homeland Security Secretary has classified veterans, retired law enforcement, Ron Paul [and Chuck Baldwin] supporters, and conservatives as ‘terrorists.’”

The Examiner report concluded by saying “If it was not clear before, it should be now that John McCain has as little respect for the Constitution as he does for our borders.”

Amen!

If McCain gets his way, your constitutional right to a speedy trial by jury is gone, as well as your constitutional right to Habeas Corpus. But, of course, they would attempt to justify this by claiming it is being done in the name of national security and the war on terrorism.

Regarding McCain’s desire for the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, attorney Jonathan Emord wrote, “If you had any doubt about whether John McCain is a limited government conservative, you may put that doubt to rest–he is not. On February 3, 2010, John McCain introduced to the United States Senate the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. Reflecting upon this poorly written bill, I am struck by the fact that John McCain apparently sees little difference between fissile material and dietary supplements. He is intent on regulating supplements as if they were radioactive enriched uranium rather than bioactive vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and botanicals that more often than not help people.

“The Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 enjoys support from the most liberal members of Congress. It is an invitation for the FDA to assume broad new powers and replicate here the system now operating in Europe over dietary supplements where dietary ingredients are presumed adulterated and unlawful to sell unless pre-approved by the government. In short, good bye free enterprise, good bye limited government, and hello more heavy handed, arbitrary and punitive FDA bias against the beleaguered dietary supplement industry.”

Please remember, this is the same John McCain who, during the 2008 Presidential campaign, said he would “order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America.” Of course, McCain didn’t explain where this authority would come from, because such a proposal has no legal or constitutional authority. And, by the way, this one little sentence, if implemented, would cost taxpayers some $300 billion.

McCain also said he wanted to tap Mr. Climate Change Wacko himself, Al Gore, “to work in his administration on developing a new and much tougher U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty.”
(Source: Cliff Kincaid. See his column at:http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff260.htm )

This is the same John McCain who addressed the Hoover Institution on May 1, 2007, and said if he were elected President, he would create a new international organization known as the “League of Democracies” (LD).

In advancing the LD, McCain said, “We should go further and start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies.” He then added, “The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order . . .”
See McCain’s speech to the Hoover Institution at:

If McCain and his CFR buddies get their way, this new LD would be a United Nations on steroids! As I said all over America on the campaign trail in 2008, “John McCain is a globalist.” Of course, so is Barack Obama. In fact, every President since (and including) George H.W. Bush has been a full-fledged, rotten-to-the-core globalist.

And, yes, this is the same John McCain who was one of the primary movers and shakers (along with Obama, Lindsey Graham, and G.W. Bush) who attempted (and would again) to provide amnesty to illegal aliens and open America’s borders to illegal immigration.

And now McCain wants the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, and he wants to give the federal government the power to jail American citizens indefinitely without trial.

The citizens of Arizona can do the American people–and liberty itself–a great favor this year by giving Senator John McCain his walking papers. Big-Government dinosaurs like McCain are an albatross around the neck of freedom and constitutional government. If we don’t send them packing now, the shackles they put around our throats will become insufferable.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Regardless of how often Obama's puppets attempt to play the American people for fools, repeating the big lie that Barack Hussein Obama's aides posted his birth certificate, a COLB is not a long form birth certificate! Such efforts to mislead have been exposed.

“In response to a direct question from WND, the Hawaii Department of Health refused to authenticate either of the two versions of President Obama’s short-form Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB, posted online – neither the image produced by the Obama campaign nor the images released by FactCheck.org" (Hawaii refuses to verify president's online COLBs).

Which hospital was Obama supposedly born in? Not a single hospital in Hawaii claims him as their own! Which doctor supposedly delivered him? These legitimate questions remain. When will responsible media address them? Obama has yet to come clean about his birth certificate. The president usurper must be called to an accounting!

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Irreversible American Decline...The white middle class has become too small, too poor, and too powerless to restore America. Obama is not an aberration. He is merely the beginning of the end. - Samuel Fistel

The decline began when white people - who founded this nation of Manasseh and for whom God intended this nation ofManasseh - forgot our roots and responsibilities and enabled non-whites to swarm here and gave them too many rights at our own expense. Obama is evidence of the curse for our national disobedience and it appears we'll fall like South Africa and Rhodesia, demanding divine deliverance from the Gentile hordes and their parasitic ways.

President Teddy Roosevelt said, "The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing as a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities."

We must renew America by restoring the racial dominance of people of white color as our former immigration policy insured (that the treacherous drunk and murderer Senator Ted Kennedy perverted in 1965).

The president usurper, the fraud and foreigner, isn't interested in anything FOR the United States, since his indoctrination against America for over 20 years at Jeremiah Wright's haven of hatred has poisoned him. Furthermore, how can Obama/Soetoro/Obamaspeak against illegal aliens when he has still failed to prove he's a natural born citizen and refuses to show his long form birth certificate?

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Among the scariest words ever heard are, “We are from the federal government, and we are here to help you.” Shiver me timbers, matey! When you hear those words, pick up your peg leg and RUN, because you are about to get hammered. And that is exactly what is fixing to happen to the American people when the new Obama national healthcare law is fully implemented: we are going to get hammered.

Anyone who believes that the federal government can manage anything efficiently is 8 years old, rationally challenged, or in the business of profiting from the federal government’s inefficiency. The only thing the federal government can do with precision is destroy things (and people). That is the one thing the feds can do with complete and total proficiency. Our first and greatest President, George Washington, understood this reality. He said, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Amen.

A recent AP report should serve as another illustration as to the folly of trusting the federal government with the supervision and care of anything beyond those narrowly limited responsibilities defined in the US Constitution. The July 27, 2010, report said, “A U.S. audit has found that the Pentagon cannot account for over 95 percent of $9.1 billion in Iraq reconstruction money, spotlighting Iraqi complaints that there is little to show for the massive funds pumped into their cash-strapped, war-ravaged nation.”
The report went on to say, “The Pentagon has repeatedly come under fire for apparent mismanagement of the reconstruction effort–as have Iraqi officials themselves.

“Seven years after the U.S.-led invasion, electricity service is spotty, with generation capacity falling far short of demand. Fuel shortages are common and unemployment remains high, a testament to the country’s inability to create new jobs or attract foreign investors.

“Complaints surfaced from the start of the war in 2003, when soldiers failed to secure banks, armories and other facilities against looters. Since then the allegations have only multiplied, including investigations of fraud, awarding of contracts without the required government bidding process and allowing contractors to charge exorbitant fees with little oversight, or oversight that came too late.”

Did you get that? “THE PENTAGON CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR OVER 95 PERCENT OF $9.1 BILLION IN IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION MONEY.” But this is the same federal government that says it can manage America’s multibillion-dollar healthcare system efficiently and with less cost. GAG!

Another report that caught my eye was this one dated August 12, 2010, and carried on My Way News. The report said, “The $700 billion U.S. bailout program launched in response to the global economic meltdown had a far greater impact overseas than other countries’ financial rescue plans did on the U.S., according to a new report from a congressional watchdog.

“Billions of dollars in U.S. rescue funds wound up in big banks in France, Germany and other nations. That was probably inevitable because of the structure of the Treasury Department’s program, the Congressional Oversight Panel says in a new report issued Thursday.

“The U.S. program aimed to stabilize the financial system by injecting money into as many banks as possible, including those with substantial operations overseas. Most other countries, by contrast, focused their efforts more narrowly on banks in their nations that usually lacked major U.S. operations.”
I’m sure everyone is glad to hear this, Amen? Aren’t you happy to learn that your hard-earned tax dollars “had a far greater impact overseas” than in the United States? In other words, ladies and gentlemen, big foreign banks (and internationally-owned banks) were the primary beneficiaries of the taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts.

The report went on to say, “But the report says that if the U.S. had gotten more data on which foreign banks would benefit the most, the government might have been able to ask those countries to share some of the cost.

“‘There were no data about where this money was going,’ panel chair Elizabeth Warren said in a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. ‘The American people have a right to know where the money went.’”

Dear Reader, are you getting this? “IF THE U.S. HAD GOTTEN MORE DATA . . . THE GOVERNMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ASK THOSE COUNTRIES TO SHARE SOME OF THE COST”? Holy slimeballs, Batman! This is the same government that is collecting nearly 2 billion pieces of electronic correspondence (emails, text messages, cellular calls, phone calls, etc.) EVERY DAY from virtually EVERY CITIZEN in the country. This is the same government that wants to electronically take our clothes off and look at every square inch of our naked bodies every time we get on a commercial airliner. But this same government was not able to obtain the data necessary to determine which foreign banks were going to receive billions of taxpayer bailout dollars? And, “There were NO DATA ABOUT WHERE THIS MONEY WAS GOING”?

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you, who are the morons here? These government politicians and bureaucrats (who are either the most inept, incompetent fools to ever live, or the most deceptive, duplicitous con artists on the planet), or We the People for putting up with these nincompoops?

At this point, I invite readers to listen to this brief archived audio sound bite from former President Ronald Reagan (one of my favorite quotes) at:

For those of you who are reading a hard copy of this column and not an online edition, and, therefore, are unable to link to the audio above, the file quotes Reagan as saying, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Do I hear an “Amen” out there?

How, in the name of common sense, can anyone (or any State) be willing to forfeit to the federal government one additional cent or even an ounce more authority knowing that every dollar it grabs and every authority it garners is used only to increase the size of the shackles that it puts around our necks?
And you want THEM to manage healthcare?

P.S. Though not yet fully caught up, we are making significant progress in getting everyone who requested to be added to our new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page posted. Actually, we were not prepared for the number of responses we got (a good thing, right?). If you are a business owner and want to be added to our PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, or if you want to locate a PATRIOT BUSINESS in your area, go here:

The vast majority of Americans do not know who he is, but someone surely does. Someone paid for his travel expenses to Pakistan and Indonesia. Someone engineered legal challenges to all of his election opponents for the State Senate and had them disqualified. Someone straightened and leveled his path to the U.S. Senate when a Democrat Judge made public the child custody records of his Republican opponent. When he was a candidate for the U.S. Senate, someone arranged for him to speak at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Someone saw to it that all of his records were sealed, both at home and abroad. Someone assembled the massive organization for his run for the Presidency. Someone knows all about him.
Who?
- Savior or Saboteur? Obama in a Realistic Light

Friday, August 13, 2010

Nile Gardiner is a Washington-based foreign affairs analyst and political commentator. He appears frequently on American and British television and radio, including Fox News Channel, CNN, BBC, Sky News, and NPR.

************
The President usurper, the fraud and foreigner, the bastard from Africa, the con man from Kenya, reveals his shady character by refusing to be transparent with many important documents from his educational records to long form birth certificate. EmperorObama must go!

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

President Obama may not fit the Constitutional eligibility requirement that stipulates only "natural born" citizens can serve as U.S. president, concluded the authors of a recently released book.

An investigation by the authors found that according to correspondence from the original framers of the Constitution as well as multiple Supreme Court rulings and the legal writings that helped establish the principals of the Constitution, Obama is not eligible to serve as president since his father was not a U.S. citizen.

With nearly 900 endnotes, the book, "The Manchurian President: Barack Obama's ties to communists, socialists and other anti-American extremists," was written by WND senior reporter Aaron Klein and r esearcher Brenda J. Elliott.

The authors concluded Obama may not be eligible regardless of his place of birth. The book recommends further legislative and judicial debate.

"It is undisputed that Obamas father was not a U.S. citizen," wrote Klein, "a fact that should have led to congressional debate about whether Obama is eligible under the United States Constitution to serve as president."

Obama was born on August 4, 1961, to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. Dunham was an American of predominantly English descent from Wichita, Kansas, and was 18 years old at the time of Obamas birth. Obama Sr. was a member of the Luo tribe from Nyangoma Kogelo, Nyanza Province, Kenya, which at the time was still a British colony.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates presidential eligibility, requiring the nations elected chief to be a natural born citizen.

That clause states: No person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitut ion specifically defines "citizen but not "natural born citizen"

A "citizen" is defined as: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

However, no definition of natural born citizen -- which is only used in the presidential requirement clause --was provided anywhere in the Constitution, and to this day the precise meaning of the term is still being debated.

There are no records of any definitive discussion on the matter during the Constitutional Convention. Thatcoupled with the absence of definitive Supreme Court rulings and a wide array of opinions th roughout the centurieshas only further confused the question of what natural born actually means.

Still, the authors found that according to the framers of the Constitution as well as Supreme Court rulings, Obama does not fit the eligibility requirements.

'Natural born' defined

The first U.S. Congress passed a law that began to define natural born. The Naturalization Act of 1790 rejected the condition of being born on U.S. soil, and referred only to parentage: The children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, the Act states, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, t hat the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

Five years later, however, Congress repealed the Act.

"Still, it was clear that the intention of the Constitutions 'natural born citizen' qualification was to ensure the country would not be led by an individual with dual loyalties," wrote Klein in "The Manchurian President."

On July 25, 1787, Founding Father John Jay, one of the three authors of the Federalist Papers, wrote to George Washington, who was at the time presiding over the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

Jay discussed the dual loyalty concern, writing: Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.

Jay, however, also did not define natural born.

'According to John Bingham, guiding tome, Obama not eligible'

Representative John Bingham of Ohio, a principal framer of the Fourteenth Amendment, offered some definition for presidential qualifi cations in a discussion in the House on March 9, 1866: [I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance toany foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.

"So according to Bingham, as well, Obama would not be eligible to serve as president," wrote Klein.

In trying to understand what the Founding Fathers meant by natural born, the authors wrote in "The Manchurian President" that some have turned to prominent legal tomes of the day.

The Law of Nations, a 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, was read by many of the American Founders and informed their understanding of the principles of law, which became established in the Constitution of 1787.

De Vattel writes in Book 1, Chapter 19, of his treatise, The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . . In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

"So by de Vattels standards, Obama arguably would not be eligible to serve as president," wrote Klein.

Obama not eligible according to some Supreme Court decisions

Numerous Supreme Court decisions have yielded conflicting views of citizenship and what it means to be a natural born citizen. In Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), for example, the Court ruled that citizenship is acquired by place of birth, not through blood or lineage.

But much of that cases decisionwhich had notoriously excluded slaves, and their descendants, from possessing Constitutional righ tswas overturned in 1868.

States that case: "At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country, of parents [plural] who were its citizens [plural], became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficien t, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.

Writes Klein: "According to this definition, and scores of other Supreme Court rulings, Obama may not be eligible to serve as president."

The authors conclude that a "reading of readily available legal resources regarding the definition of 'natural born citizen clearly indicates a series of legitimate questions about Barack Obamas eligibility for the presidency, given that Obamas father was not an American citizen."

"The resources warrant further debate," wrote Klein.

"The Manchurian President" points out despite these glaring eligibility issues, the legislative and judicial bodies of the U.S. government have held no formal discussions, nor did they conduct a single formal investigation into whether Obama is eligible to serve under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The scion of distinguished U.S. naval officers, McCain was born to two American parents in the Panama Canal Zone. On April 30, 2008, the U.S. Senate sought to answer the question by passing a nonbinding resolution, which states, "Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it resolved, that John Sidney McCain, III, is a 'natural born citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States."

Obama called 'Manchurian President'

Meanwhile, "The Manchurian President" bills itself as the most exhaustive investigation ever performed into Obama and his radical background and ties.

Among the many finds of "The Manchurian President":

A coalition of extremists, including a founder of William Ayers' Weather Underground domestic-terrorist organization, helped craft Obama's "stimulus" bill;

Obama's health-care policy, masked by moderate populists rhetoric, was pushed along and partially crafted by extremists, some of whom reveal in their own words that their principal aim is to achieve corporate socialist goals and a vast increase in government powers;

Extremists are among Obama's "czars" and other top advisers. New information links top advisers Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett to communist activists. The book uncovers correspondence in which a communist confesses to mentoring and educating Axelrod and helping the top Obama aide to secure his first job. Obama then later worked with the same communist, the book finds;

Copious research reveals more about Obama's deep ties to Ayers, uncovering for the first time where and how Obama first met Ayers - and it is much earlier than previously believed;

Important aspects of Obama's carefully covered-up college years, with new details of his student career at Occidental College and later at Columbia University, are revealed;

Obama's early years, including his previously overlooked early childhood ties to a radical, far-left church, are documented;

Obama's association with the Nation of Islam, Black Liberation Theology and black political extremists are also revealed, with extensive new information on the subjects;

Obama's deep ties to ACORN, which are much more extensive than previously documented elsewhere, are covered. The book also crucially descries how a socialist-led, ACORN-affiliated union helped facilitate Obama's political career and now exerts major influence in the White House.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

One of the tragedies of the current misled, uninformed, and otherwise preoccupied American citizenry is the seeming apathy regarding the importance and necessity of electing constitutionalist sheriffs. In many ways, State governors and county sheriffs just might be the most important elected offices in America. It is no hyperbole to say that State governors and county sheriffs form the last line of defense against tyranny and oppression. If our governors and sheriffs do not understand the principles of freedom and federalism, there is virtually zero protection against the abuses of liberty–save the right of the people to personally and individually defend liberty via the principles of God-given Natural Law.

Hence, a freedom-minded sheriff is invaluable to liberty’s defense. And perhaps at no time in America’s history has it been more necessary that we elect freedom-loving sheriffs than it is today, what with the ever-growing propensity of the federal government to trample and usurp State and constitutional protections of freedom.

For example, in an almost totally non-reported incident, an armed conflict between federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agents and a Nevada Sheriff’s SWAT team was averted only by virtue of the fact that, at the last minute, BLM backed down from the impending confrontation.

For the record: federal police agencies have a long history of committing illegal searches and seizures (even assault and murder–can anyone say, “Ruby Ridge” or “Waco”?) against the US citizenry. But BLM might be the most notorious federal police agency of all. The tactics BLM employs against western landowners sometimes border on Nazi-like. When the late, great Helen Chenoweth was an Idaho congresswoman, she tried to raise awareness of (and opposition to) this out-of-control federal agency. I urge readers to read Rep. Chenoweth’s interview with Michael Reagan about this subject. See it at:

According to Rep. Chenoweth, “BLM is taking onto themselves law enforcement that is normally saved for the State, law enforcement over motor vehicles. They’ve written into the regulation without authority from Congress, the ability to stop vehicles or to search people, to search a place or a vehicle without warrant or process; to be able to seize without warrant or process any piece of evidence and to test people for potential DUI (driving under the influence).”

Chenoweth continued: “Our founders, when establishing our system of government wanted to make sure that law enforcement was closest to the people. You and I have talked before about how important it is to make sure that you elect the very best local county sheriff because he should be regarded as the highest law enforcement officer in the area because he is accountable to the voters. They really worried about a national, a federal, law enforcement. To federalize our law enforcement is to create a situation that the pilgrims were trying to escape.

“We are moving quickly to that. The Bureau of Land Management is taking onto themselves law enforcement authority that Congress never gave them. In the Federal Land Policy and Management Act that was passed in the early 1970s it made it clear that Congress said that, first, you must go to your local county sheriff for law enforcement activities.”

Chenoweth added, “In the BLM proposed rules and regulations, you can’t remove any plants or soil or pick up any rocks or minerals. You can’t drive on any vegetation or soil. You can’t disturb soil at all. Now you can’t set a foot on soil without disturbing it. You can’t set a foot on a ground plant without disturbing it.”
For the sheriff in Nye County, Nevada, BLM abridgments of liberty had gone too far. When BLM threatened to arrest the sheriff if he refused to go along with BLM’s illegal searches and seizures against Nye County citizens, Sheriff Tony DeMeo countered by telling BLM in no uncertain terms that should any agent attempt to enforce BLM’s unconstitutional policies, he would have his deputies arrest them.

DeMeo even had his SWAT teams standing by to enforce the law AGAINST THE OUT-OF-CONTROL FEDERAL AGENCY. To put it in Sheriff DeMeo’s words, “We’d be standing between them [BLM] and my constituents [county residents].” At the last minute, BLM backed off and the confrontation between the Nye County sheriff’s office and the federal agency was averted.

Now, Sheriff Tony DeMeo is exactly the kind of sheriff the Constitution requires! Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of sheriffs across the country have no idea as to what their constitutional authority entails, and seem to have no discernment and understanding of just what the federal government is doing to usurp State and local jurisdiction. Or if they do, they seem to lack the courage to act upon their power and authority. Or maybe they simply lust after federal monies (better known as bribes).
Of course, there are a few sheriffs across America who seem to be aware of what’s going on and have the guts to do something about it. A precious few. Along with Sheriff Tony DeMeo, there is Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Shane Harrington of Wibaux County, Montana, Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Arizona, and, of course, there are former Sheriffs Ray Nash of Dorchester County, South Carolina, Richard Mack of Graham County, Arizona, and Jay Printz of Ravalli County, Montana. Plus, if the good people of Larimer County, Colorado, will elect Carl Bruning as their sheriff, there will be another principled constitutionalist sheriff to add to the list of patriot sheriffs. To visit Carl’s campaign web site, go here:

Readers should know, too, that Sheriff Mack has a plethora of outstanding books and videos relating to the role and duty of a constitutional sheriff on his web site. I highly recommend that you avail yourself to as much of Mack’s materials as you can. Here is his web site:

If liberty has any chance of surviving in the United States, it will be because the American people wake up to the importance and necessity of electing constitutionalist governors and sheriffs. Sheriffs, especially, are critical to the maintenance of liberty. It is a truism that, next to the people themselves, the sheriff’s office helps form the last line of defense against federal abuse of power. Long live the constitutionalist Sheriff!

P.S. We are trying to keep up with those requesting to be added to our new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, but are having a hard time keeping up with requests. Please be patient. We are adding them as fast as we can. My small staff is quite overloaded, but hopes to be caught up by the end of the week. To see the new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, go to:

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Reading your last commentary [The Triumph Of Jewish Survival] has reminded me you are a complete moron. You think America and England are Jews? LOL. You fool, read history, in fact, read the Bible. Your actions will come to bear you out when stand before Him. Think before you do.

You have been fooled to think this, you need to get on your knees and ask God to show this to you. There is just too much information on this matter. Nothing else to say about this.

Response to Tom:

How foolish you appear since you still don't recognize the difference between Jews (Judah) and Israel (the "lost 10 Tribes). Such ignorance is inexcusable. Satan hates this plain truth and works hard to keep folks in the dark. God knows I'm doing what I can to help spread the light about how God is faithful to Joseph and Judah and can also be trusted for His other prophecies to come true.

A writer who was collecting material for a fictional book based around the premise that top Nazis, seeking to preserve their power at the end of the second world war, conspired to create a Fourth Reich under the auspices of the European Union, actually discovered documents proving the plot to be true.

In a Daily Mail piece, Adam Lebor reveals how he uncovered US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128, also known as The Red House Report, which details how top Nazis secretly met at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944 and, knowing Germany was on the brink of military defeat, conspired to create a Fourth Reich – a pan-European economic empire based around a European common market.

Top Nazi industrialists were ordered by SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid to set up front companies abroad and pose as democrats in order to achieve economic penetration and lay the foundations for the re-emergence of the Nazi party.

“The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration,” writes Lebor.

Wealthy Nazi industrialists like Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, as well as front companies like BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, set about the task of building a new pan-European business empire. According to historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers, “For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler….The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.”

Banking titan Hermann Abs, who joined board of Deutsche Bank during the rise of Nazis, also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, the company that made the Zyklon B gas used to kill concentration camp victims. “Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid – reconstruction funds – to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany’s economic recovery,” writes Lebor.

“Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.”

The European League for Economic Co-operation developed policies for European integration that almost mirrored those proposed by Nazis just years previously.

In his book “Europe’s Full Circle,” Rodney Atkinson provides a list of policies proposed by Nazis and their similarity to today’s European Union.

Europaische Wirtshaftsgemeinschaft
European Economic Community

European Currency System
European Exchange Rate Mechanism

Europabank (Berlin)
European Central Bank (Frankfurt)

European Regional Principle
Committee of the Regions

Common Labour Policy
Social Chapter

Economic and Trading Agreements
Single Market

“Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?” asks Lebor.

“These three typewritten pages are a reminder that today’s drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich – an economic rather than military imperium.”

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s. Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency were formulated by Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was duly followed after the end of the second world war.

In his 1940 book The European Community, Nazi Economics Minister and war criminal Walther Funk wrote about the need to create a “Central European Union” and “European Economic Area” and for fixed exchange rates, stating “No nation in Europe can achieve on its own the highest level of economic freedom which is compatible with all social requirements…The formation of very large economic areas follows a natural law of development….interstate agreements in Europe will control [economic forces generally]…There must be a readiness to subordinate one’s own interests in certain cases to those of [the EC].”

Funk’s co-authors echoed his sentiments. Nazi academic Heinrich Hunke wrote, “Classic national economy..is dead…community of fate which is the European economy…fate and extent of European co-operation depends on a new unity economic plan”.

Fellow Nazi Gustav Koenig observed, “We have a real European Community task before us…I am convinced that this Community effort will last beyond the end of the war.”

In 1940, Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels ordered the creation of the “large-scale economic unification of Europe,” believing that “in fifty years’ time [people would] no longer think in terms of countries.” Just 53 years later, the European Union in its current form was established.

Other top Nazis who called for the creation of a pan-European federal economic superstate include Ribbentrop, Quisling and Seyss-Inquart, who spoke of “The new Europe of solidarity and co-operation among all its people… will find…rapidly increasing prosperity once national economic boundaries are removed.”

Such rhetoric would not look out of place at a present day Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission or CFR confab.

The Nazis killed people who spoke out against the Third Reich, whereas the EU has implemented an altogether more efficient solution – simply kill their free speech instead.

Most of the individuals who hold the reigns of power in the European Union are not Nazis, indeed, they probably believe themselves to be fair-minded liberals working for the “greater good”. However, the European Union by its very nature is totalitarian, because it seeks to remove power from national governments accountable to their electorate and centralize it into the hands of supra-national entities that are accountable to nobody but themselves. It also seeks to remove the right of free speech for anyone in a position of influence who criticizes this agenda.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which will again be put before Irish voters later this year despite them already rejecting it in a national referendum, which prevented the treaty from being enforced.

************Beyond Babylon: Europe’s Rise and Fall, in the biblical tradition of Herbert W. Armstrong, has been warning about a German-dominated Europe for years!

“Our own government has become our enemy.” So said Pinal County (Arizona) Sheriff Paul Babeu.

“Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

“‘What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU.’ Babeu said.”
The Arizona Sheriff was then quoted as saying: “Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help.”

Sheriff Babeu is not the only one who believes that our own federal government has become our enemy. Writing for Investor’s Business Daily, attorney Ernest Christian and economist Gary Robbins co-authored a July 30, 2010, column entitled “Will Washington’s Failures Lead To Second American Revolution?”

Christian and Robbins write, “People are asking, ‘Is the [federal] government doing us more harm than good? Should we change what it does and the way it does it?’

“Pruning the power of government begins with the imperial presidency.
“Too many overreaching laws give the president too much discretion to make too many open-ended rules controlling too many aspects of our lives. There’s no end to the harm an out-of-control president can do.”

But it’s not just an imperial presidency we need to worry about; and it certainly did not originate with Barack Obama–although he has certainly accelerated the pace of this federal aggression. For all intents and purposes, the last four Presidencies have been imperialist in nature. In other words, we have endured at least 22 years of federal imperialism, encompassing both Republican and Democrat Presidential administrations. But it has also been Republican and Democrat congresses (along with a compliant federal judiciary) that have assisted and facilitated this out-of-control federal imperialism. In other words, folks: the entire federal system is now illegitimate and broken!

The federal government has become a monstrous leech that has affixed itself to the underbelly of the American republic and is sucking its lifeblood out with a vengeance. It has increased its surveillance of the American citizenry to the point that–for all intents and purposes–we now live in a Soviet-style, East Bloc society: our phone calls, emails, cellular transmissions, etc., are being feverishly monitored; our financial transactions are scrutinized; this new national (socialist) healthcare system is nothing more than modern-day slavery; our manufacturing jobs have been deliberately outsourced to the point that America’s real unemployment numbers are around 20% (Source: economist Donald McAlvany); the international bankers and their collaborators in DC could be described as the ultimate crime syndicate without much fear of hyperbole; the federal government’s control and manipulation of our public schools has resulted in the fact that the United States now has the most expensive and least productive education system in the industrialized world; and now it is teaming up with the ACLU (not to mention thousands of Mexican gang members, drug dealers, human traffickers, rapists, and murderers) to fight the State of Arizona for its attempt to simply enforce the law. Yes, I would say that should classify the federal government as our enemy, all right.

If you doubt DC’s arrogance, I challenge you to watch the following video of Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA), who said, “The federal government, yes, can do most anything.” With congressmen such as this, does anyone wonder why the federal government has grown into such a monster?

Christian and Robbins could be right when they suggest that it might be time for a second American revolution! I might even argue, in many respects, that revolution has already begun. State governors and legislators across the country are increasingly frustrated with DC’s arrogance and bullying, and are pushing back. Jan Brewer and her brave Arizonans are not the only State to start drawing a line in the sand. Millions of freedom-loving citizens in these states have about reached the boiling point. I really don’t think it would take much of a spark to set this country ablaze with the “Spirit of ’76″ all over again.

Remember, it was the states that created the federal government–not the other way around. And the states never surrendered their authority or autonomy, not to Washington, D.C., or to any other power. I don’t care what anyone says to the contrary; the states retained their Declaration status, that they were “Free and Independent” AFTER the US Constitution was enacted and the federal government formed in 1787. If the framers intended to make America “one nation,” meaning one national government absent the features of federalism requiring State independence and power to serve as a check and balance against the imperialist tendencies of a central government, why were the states not dissolved when the Constitution was adopted? The states maintained independence for the very reason that Arizona and other states today are resisting federal encroachment, or in the case of illegal immigration, inaction: to arrest federal failure!

Therefore, when Sheriff Babeu said that the federal government “has become our enemy,” he was 100% correct. Now it’s time for the American people as a whole to not only recognize the enemy, but to recognize the solution: enlightened and energized states willing to fight for their independence! And if that means another American revolution, so be it!

P.S. As promised in my last column, we have uploaded a brand new web page entitled “PATRIOT BUSINESSES.” Happily, we have been inundated with business owners requesting to be added to this new directory. We are working hard to have most of these businesses posted on the page by week’s end. To view the PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, go to:http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=1921

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

The GOP is frantically searching for the person who will lead them to the Promised Land (translate: White House) in 2012. Barack Obama is leaving a death stench so heavy that even most of the political allies in his own party are asking him to stay away from their reelection campaigns. You gotta give it to Obama: he has done in one term what most Presidents cannot accomplish until their second (lame duck) term. The problem is, the GOP just can’t seem to find their Moses (or even their Ronald Reagan). That means, as far fetched as it sounds now, Obama has a good chance of being reelected. And, once again, when any Democrat candidate for President wins, the GOP will have no one to blame but themselves. 2012 could be another example.

You see, the GOP (including their lackeys at Fox News) either really don’t know what a constitutional conservative looks like, or they do know what he or she looks like and don’t want them leading the party. I believe the answer is the latter, but in either case, the GOP continually does nothing to groom constitutionalist conservatives for leadership. Just the opposite: such people are routinely ignored, shunned, besmirched, or impugned. (Can anyone say, “Ron Paul”?) Is it any wonder that by the time the general election comes around, the GOP candidate for President is usually nothing more than a Democrat-lite, or a “Democrat in Drag” to borrow from Steve Farrell.

That brings me to one of the people that the talking heads at Fox News and other GOP propaganda centers are routinely discussing as their 2012 Presidential hopeful: former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

According to Reuters News, “Republican former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich said on Sunday [July 25th] he will decide after November’s congressional elections whether he will make a run for the White House in 2012.”

Here’s what Gingrich is looking at: he wants to see if the GOP makes significant gains in both houses of Congress in the November elections. If the GOP wins one house (especially if enough real conservatives win), I predict Gingrich will enter the race. So he can ride a conservative wave into the White House in 2012? No! So he can derail any potential conservative momentum that the Tea Parties might be able to create in this year’s November elections. You see, Newt Gingrich is the Grinch Who Stole Conservatism from the GOP.

Some of us are old enough to remember Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” that produced huge Republican victories in both houses of Congress back in 1994. However, what did that “Conservative Revolution” (as it was called then) actually produce? The answer: NOTHING! Newt’s promise of smaller government was immediately forgotten. Instead, Gingrich, along with Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, facilitated and helped orchestrate further expansion of the federal government. The “less government” theme that swept house freshmen such as Joe Scarborough, Steve Largent, Sonny Bono, Bob Barr, Helen Chenoweth, John Shadegg, and J.C. Watts into Congress quickly evaporated and this new neocon Republican Party was born.

Mark it down, if Newt Gingrich is the Republican Party’s Presidential nominee in 2012, he will do to whatever grassroots conservative momentum is brought about by this year’s congressional victories what he did to the “Conservative Revolution” in 1994: DESTROY IT!

Newt’s track record is there for anyone to see. So, why does Fox News continue to promote him as a leader of smaller government or constitutionalism? Does Fox News even have a clue as to what limited government really means? Apparently not.

Remember, Newt Gingrich is a long-standing member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which is a notorious proponent of globalism and archenemy of national independence, State sovereignty, and limited government. Does anyone at Fox News recall what Admiral Chester Ward said about the CFR? (Plus, how many of the Big Shots at Fox News are themselves members of the CFR?)

Rear Admiral Chester Ward, who was the Judge Advocate General of the Navy from 1956 to 1960 and a former member of the CFR who pulled out after realizing what they were all about, warned the American people about the dangers of this and similar organizations (such as the Trilateral Commission). He said, “The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common–they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States. A second clique of international members in the CFR . . . comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government.”

Admiral Ward also said, “The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government.”

Accordingly, as a loyal CFR elitist, Gingrich has supported Big Government programs and policies all of his political life. Gingrich is also an ardent disciple of Alvin Toffler, who is the guru of “The Third Wave” politics. That’s why Gingrich refers to himself as a “conservative futurist.”

Steve Farrell rightly notes that “futurism is a head-in-the-clouds political philosophy, complete with theories and forecasts, which envisions the use of force to insure that those theories and forecasts come to pass.” Farrell summarizes “conservative futurism” as “communism with economic vision.”

This is why Gingrich went along with Clinton’s Big Government agenda, and supported the unconstitutional faith-based subsidies, public-private “partnerships,” etc. Gingrich’s brand of “conservatism” spawned another Big Government neocon’s (Karl Rove–another favorite son at Fox News) “Compassionate Conservative” movement of the G.W. Bush White House, which at the time led to the biggest expansion of the federal government since Lyndon Johnson.

Gingrich’s infatuation with “conservative futurism” also helps explain his support for NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and virtually every other policy promoting globalism and interdependence. It also helps explain why Gingrich and former Vice President Al Gore have worked so closely together in globalist organizations such as the now-defunct Congressional Clearing House on the Future (once chaired by Gore).

Gingrich was also a major proponent of the federal Department of Education, continually supports unconstitutional foreign aid, even to the Soviets and other unfriendly governments, through the Export-Import Bank. In one year (1994-1995) Gingrich voted for nearly $45 billion in foreign aid. He also helped push through federal loan guarantees to Communist China.

Gingrich was the Grand Old Pal of President Bill Clinton. He supported Clinton’s unconstitutional wars (as he did Bush’s); he supported Clinton’s welfare programs, education programs, labor programs, and environmental programs, as well as most of his foreign affairs programs. Gingrich supported spending $30 billion for the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that shackled gun owners with new restrictions, federalized a number of crimes, and handed the feds police powers that the Constitution reserves to the states. (I guess the NRA forgot all about that, too.)

Gingrich voted to give billions of dollars to United Nations “peacekeeping” operations; he supported the National Endowment for the Arts; he supports giving illegal aliens amnesty; and he has continually supported increased federal spending and higher taxes.

Also, John McManus has an outstanding video exposing Newt Gingrich as a traitor to conservatism and constitutional government that everyone should watch. See it at:http://vimeo.com/6445068

In spite of overwhelming evidence that Newt Gingrich is a scheming, double-talking, duplicitous Big-Government globalist of the highest order, many conservatives continue to listen to pro-Gingrich propaganda coming from Fox News and other “conservative” outlets.

If true conservatism has any chance of reemerging within the sheepfold of what is known as the national Republican Party, that fox, Newt Gingrich, must not be allowed to be anywhere near it. Unfortunately, thanks to Fox News (pun too easy to pass up), Gingrich is prowling around the barnyard and doubtless licking his chops at the prospect of having another opportunity to feast on the flesh of unsuspecting conservative sheep that foolishly believe him to be one of them.

P.S. My office has been inundated with business owners wishing to be added to our new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web directory. Hopefully, most of these early participants will be uploaded to the web page by the end of the workday today (Friday). But as we are still receiving the names of those who want to be included, this process will doubtless continue into next week. Please keep watching the page, and if you own a business and want to be included, send us the information requested. To see the PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, go here:

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

It is not in Germany's mind today, or its present peaceful people, to wage war against us, but that will all change overnight, after a head-on collision with the Islamic leader of a confederation of Muslim states, their mahdi, whetting Europe's appetite for more blood and morphing the EU into THE BEAST. They will destroy all Muslim opposition with a vengeance.

Whereas most Germans are not aware of vile intentions of influential Germans under Jesuit influence to revive the unholy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the Fourth Reich, to embark on a new crusade into the Middle East, Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall bares their grand design before the world: the German-Assyrians will strike again!

The Atlantic Times, regardless of whether or not they believe any of this prophetic scenario possible, owes it to their readers to address this issue that is most serious to a growing number of Bible-believing Christians and many Jews. Can we trust them to deliver?